刑事瑕疵证据运用实证研究

An empirical study on the application of slight defective evidence

从"两个证据规则"到2012年修改后的《刑事诉讼法》,再到各类司法解释,在刑事诉讼领域形成了一个初具雏形的证据规则体系,但各类规范本身存在着体系性不足、明确性不够等问题。实证分析显示,瑕疵证据的运用存在诸如瑕疵证据和非法证据之间划分不清,法官的自由裁量权较大,被告人及其辩护人相应权利没有得到保护等问题。为规范瑕疵证据的运用,未来刑事证据制度改革应在以下几个方面有所突破:规范法官自由裁量权;明确瑕疵证据的补正顺序及范围;保护辩方的相应权利。

From the“two rules of evidence”to the revised Criminal Procedure Law in 2012,and then to various judicial interpretations,a rudimentary system of evidence rules has been formed in the field of criminal procedure,but there are some problems such as insufficient system and clarity in the various norms.Empirical analysis shows that there are some problems in the use of defective evidence,such as the unclear distinction between defective evidence and illegal evidence,the judge's discretion is greater,the defendant and his defender's corresponding rights are not protected.In order to standardize the use of slight defective evidence,the reform of criminal evidence system in the future should make some breakthroughs in the following aspects:standardizing the discretion of judges,clarifying the order and scope of the correction of slight defective evidence and protecting the corresponding rights of the defense.